Skip to content
← The Issue Encyclopedia

Issue Encyclopedia · Guideline G · Alcohol

Binge / Intoxication Pattern

What the decided record shows for this issue, computed from public DOHA hearing-level decisions. Descriptive history, not a prediction.

Does binge / intoxication pattern affect a security clearance?

Binge / Intoxication Pattern is an issue decided under Guideline G, Alcohol. In the decided DOHA record it appears in 1,079 hearing-level cases, and 23% of the 1,076 decided ended with access granted (251 granted, 825 denied). The mitigating conditions judges credited most often, and example decisions either way, are below.

Basis: 1,076 decided hearing-level cases raising this issue. Descriptive history of decided cases, not a prediction.

More questions people ask the record

Decided cases

1,079

hearing-level decisions raising this issue

Granted

23%

251 granted · 825 denied or revoked

Official mitigating conditions cited

The formal mitigating conditions the case profiles identified on this issue, in cases that were granted and in cases that were denied. Each is shown with its paragraph number and a plain name. Read what each condition says.
  • ¶ 23(b) · The pattern acknowledged, with modified use or abstinence established

    In granted cases
    88
    In denied cases
    22
  • ¶ 23(a) · So much time has passed, or the incidents were so infrequent

    In granted cases
    69
    In denied cases
    15
  • ¶ 23(c) · In counseling or treatment, with satisfactory progress

    In granted cases
    57
    In denied cases
    14
  • ¶ 23(d) · Treatment and aftercare completed, with abstinence established

    In granted cases
    25
    In denied cases
    1

Circumstances credited in granted cases

The specific circumstances the judge expressly credited among the granted cases on this issue where that detail was extracted.
  • rehabilitation evidence · credited in 2 granted cases
  • abstinence period documented · credited in 1 granted case
  • acknowledgment and remorse · credited in 1 granted case

Recent decided examples

  • This case involves security concerns regarding the applicant's alcohol consumption, drug involvement, psychological conditions, and personal conduct. The applicant admitted to several allegations rela…

  • Applicant, a defense contractor employee, was granted a clearance under Guideline G. The SOR alleged long term excessive alcohol use, current vodka consumption, two alcohol related arrests in 2008 and…

  • The case involves an applicant seeking security clearance who faced allegations under Guidelines I, G, and E, primarily related to psychological conditions, alcohol consumption, and personal conduct. …

  • Applicant, a federal contractor access patrol officer, was denied a clearance under Guidelines G, I, and E, but prevailed on Guideline H. The judge found a serious January 2022 alcohol-related workpla…

See all 1,079 decisions on this issue

Related issues under Guideline G

How these numbers are measured

Scope: decided hearing-level cases whose per-allegation profile records this issue, matched to the same issue value the search filters use, so a count here and a filtered search always agree. A case raising several issues counts under each one. The mitigating conditions and the credited circumstances below were extracted for a subset of the record, so both are counts of cases rather than rates. Pages exist only for issues with at least 25 decided cases, and † marks any split built on fewer than 20.

Reading the statistics

  • Granted = access granted or continued; Denied = denied or revoked.
  • Grant rate = granted ÷ (granted + denied).
  • † marks figures based on fewer than 20 cases, too few to be reliable.
  • Hovering any rate shows its statistical range (a 95% confidence interval).
  • Figures are descriptive counts over decided, public DOHA ISCR decisions, never predictions or assessments of any pending case.

Where to go from here

Get help with my case

Send us your question, or the Statement of Reasons you received. No charge, and a CASE analyst reads it. Usually five to ten business days.

Ask a question →

I do this for clients

Rank every decision by how closely it matches a matter, see how the assigned judge has ruled, and keep it together with cited exports.

For attorneys and firms →

Decided public cases: descriptive, never a prediction.